kapkomet

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Nov 24, 2009 -> 08:05 PM) He's personally called in around 40% of the threats. True story. I knew that damn red phone had to go somewhere.

By the way, I've not once said that I'm for the filibuster rules as they are. I'm just saying that everyone wants to play like their side is better, and they're not.

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 24, 2009 -> 07:19 PM) And uhhh George Tiller, one specific case. I don't take anything I said in this thread. This doesn't change that I think Beck, et al are being incredibly irresponsible for money, and the ridiculous # of death threats needing to be checked out by the President are one example. Nice, so now you're correlating Beck with the # of death threats the president gets. Ummm hmmm.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 24, 2009 -> 07:14 PM) Because this health care debate...that hasn't gone on NEARLY long enough! It hasn't. I hope it takes the next three years.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 24, 2009 -> 07:12 PM) Quite frankly, yeah. Ok, dude. It's just an option that outlaws private insurance for new enrollments or other changes or taxes the s*** out of it so that no one can afford it. Or you get fined and/or thrown in jail. But it's an option. I love semantics.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 24, 2009 -> 07:12 PM) I think you're missing the point...2006-2008 it was your guys doing the filibustering to prevent the President from having to use his veto pen. So in that case, it didn't stop anything that wasn't going to be stopped anyway. So what. In 2009, it's used to stop things that should have a lot more debate to it then a simple majority getting shoved up our ass.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 24, 2009 -> 07:11 PM) And for the billionth time, stating that this is a public takeover continues to reflect poorly on anyone who says it. It is. Not all in one shot, but it is. So I guess I'm "reflect(ed) poorly".

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 24, 2009 -> 07:02 PM) Who do you think was doing the Filibustering from 2006-2008? Do you miss the point on purpose? I think so.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 24, 2009 -> 07:04 PM) Either they're right or this country will be bankrupt in 10 years because its paying 25% of its GDP for health insurance. It will be, because they're wrong. The bill is written to lie on the numbers. You all want to believe this utopian "we can provide better health care, ensure all things are covered, add more people, while lowering costs" bulls***. It's impossible. If these numbers are true, our "health care system" will provide 25% of what it does today, and I'll take a higher cost for better health care, thank you. And for the billionth time, no one is saying don't fix what's broke, but a public take over is not the way out.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 23, 2009 -> 08:11 PM) And then chop off $700 billion, like the CBO says you should, over the next 20 years. LMAO. You believe that s***?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 24, 2009 -> 02:03 PM) So you say we should perhaps make Congress's health care plan more like that of the rest of America's? Since the Senate bill requires Congress to enroll in the health care exchange system they're setting up, I assume we now have your support? I don't think that's true: and if it is, they will put the House version in place, because there's no way they accept that. I had read somewhere that it's not the same as what you and I will be forced into.

QUOTE (longshot7 @ Nov 24, 2009 -> 06:37 PM) Agreed. let them read the phone book for hours on end. Like I said, of course it's ok from 2006-2008. Or whenever there's a Republican president.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 23, 2009 -> 08:10 PM) And the Gang of 14 was over the filibuster of 7 out of George W. Bush's total of over 320 Judicial nominees. Yea, and we're probably going to be looking at the same #'s for Obama. You just don't hear about crap unless it's controversial. What about Hamilton who just got nominated? Just another example.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 23, 2009 -> 07:23 PM) And that everything is great kind of way is the one where this concept of "Addition" and "Math" actually holds true. Edit: This must be after your great takeover, right? Seriously, just cut and paste out the medicare and medicaid and replace it with "government health care".

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 23, 2009 -> 08:01 PM) if you're pretending that nothing changed after the 2006 election, where the Filibuster immediately went from something that the minority would use at least somewhat sparingly, to a 60 vote standard for every single vote, then really, we've got nothing left to discuss. I can't say "don't you love how blue the sky is today" and then form a coherent response when you insist it is actually yellow. Gang of 14 = 2005. And there were others against GWB. It's not every day that you see tax and kill (cap and trade) and bankrupt-care bills like this year has gone. It is fresh now because it has to be used in the sense there's no other way to stop things that frankly, are going to set this country back forever. And what's even funnier is that there's STILL no way to stop any of it if the Dems are united. See Saturday.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 23, 2009 -> 07:25 PM) Kap's right about that but he's wrong about saying that the 60 vote requirement we have right now for everything existed even 4 years ago. It did. This procedural stuff has been around for a long time... the reason it seems like it wasn't is because there wasn't a government power grab for everything under the sun 4 years ago. And I'm talking about both parties, not the last 10 months.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Nov 23, 2009 -> 06:11 PM) Health care reform will not balance the budget. In a utopian, everything is great kind of way, it will.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Nov 23, 2009 -> 06:13 PM) Not if he's talking about me specifically. Not you specifically, but there's quite a few here that fit that mold.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 23, 2009 -> 04:41 PM) It would have been really useful to have had this filibuster standard in 2001. You did.

Be honest, you're all for it if it benefits your cause.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Nov 22, 2009 -> 05:06 PM) The worst thing about it is that for many of the "moderate" holdouts, it has very little to do with principles, it has to do with money. Yet they protest in the name of the deficit. For Lieberman its the chance to succeed Dodd as being the Senator from the state of Aetna and guarantee a flow of campaign donations he won't see in 2012 as an independent. For Landrieu its 300 million dollars in added benefits for Louisiana. I'm sure there's a price tag for Lincoln and Nelson as well. Frankly, it makes me a little sick to see. I hope they see primaries in their next elections and get replaced by other Dems with a bit more sense of principle. Me too. But it won't happen.

TCU! Seriously, they're pretty good.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 21, 2009 -> 04:44 PM) Except for Women, Jews, African Americans, Asians, Hispanics, Homosexuals, and a fair number of white males. That's awesome.

She's not going for it so far. Where did I go wrong?

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 20, 2009 -> 04:15 PM) ah, once again, the only person you can make fun of on this forum without worry is AHB. I can make fun of you anytime. But you'll just get pissed off.